I was so excited to see this issue being discussed outside of the name nerd world when I saw this piece on Jezebel earlier, then I came here to make a thread & saw this wonderful one! I feel like the original piece could have presented the argument more clearly, but it's great to see this being discussed as a feminist topic & could not agree with the sentiment more.

So many amazing points have been made here, that I don't have much to add. However, on the question of what we can actually do about it, my choice is to encourage the use of unisex names (mostly nature or surname names) instead of historically male ones to posters who are set on giving their daughter a tomboyish name & to keep making this argument to anyone who'll listen. I don't think the answer is giving to give our sons a girls' name, though; until the wider misogynistic attitudes change, there's no use consigning little boys to miserable childhoods.

April 10th, 2013, 03:25 PM

ninanoo

Here is my opinion, straight forward and simply spoken. Boy names on girls is part of the genderless movement. Weither you are aware of this movement or not, you are being influenced by a culture which is. It isn't about men being better. It is about eliminating the difference between sexes entirely.

April 10th, 2013, 04:00 PM

augusta_lee

Quote:

Originally Posted by ninanoo

Here is my opinion, straight forward and simply spoken. Boy names on girls is part of the genderless movement. Weither you are aware of this movement or not, you are being influenced by a culture which is. It isn't about men being better. It is about eliminating the difference between sexes entirely.

I can't wait to meet your sons, Annabelle and Delilah! Oh wait, you would never actually give a son those names? Because they are considered female? And there goes your "genderless names" argument.

April 10th, 2013, 04:10 PM

augusta_lee

Quote:

Originally Posted by rowangreeneyes

Every time a debate like this arises on Nameberry (which is very often,) I start contemplating two things...

1) Where is the end to this argument? What do the people who are so adamantly against "boys names on girls" plan to do about it other than not name their daughter a boyish name? Name their son Jessica? What is the point of going around in circles and over analyzing everything?

2) Why posters asking about a unisex or boy name on a girl get responses like "_____ is a boy's name!" or "I wouldn't use it because it sounds too masculine." And then a post about someone naming their daughter Elizabeth for the gazillionth time gets responses like "Oh that's such a beautiful combo!" and "What a gorgeous name for a little girl!" Double standards I guess. Although it does kind of suck to be in the super minority on Nameberry and *GASP* like unisex and masculine names on girls.

Also, when does a name go from masculine to culturally accepted as a unisex name? Take Riley as an example. Riley for girls didn't even breach the top 1000 until 1990. Riley was a common boys name since 1912. And now we don't even bat an eye at a girl named Riley/Rilee/Rhylee (other than it being too popular) Isn't Riley the "Maxwell" of the early 1990's? A name gets super common for boys, and then ultimately someone decides to use it for a girl. It isn't a new trend. It's happened to hundreds of names throughout history. So are we finally going to be the generation to break the mold and start using girls names for boys? Probably not. There will be little girls named William and Benjamin in the next decade or so, and eventually we're just going to have to either accept it as a part of human psychology or we change it.

Clearly you have not read a single one of the other comments on this thread. Every "point" you make is addressed numerous times.

April 10th, 2013, 04:19 PM

covella

In society it's cool for girls to be masculine and tough (I think this is fine, btw) but if a male shows any sign of femininity (like his name), he will be bashed and made fun of. What is wrong with the world?

April 10th, 2013, 05:09 PM

ninanoo

Quote:

Originally Posted by augusta_lee

I can't wait to meet your sons, Annabelle and Delilah! Oh wait, you would never actually give a son those names? Because they are considered female? And there goes your "genderless names" argument.

There are people doing it. I am not into the genderless movement at all. I am actually pretty offended by the concept as I believe in traditional female and male roles. But it exists none the less. You should look into it. Evidence of it is everywhere. Something in particular to get you started that you could google is, "Genderless school"

April 10th, 2013, 08:49 PM

augusta_lee

Quote:

Originally Posted by ninanoo

There are people doing it. I am not into the genderless movement at all. I am actually pretty offended by the concept as I believe in traditional female and male roles. But it exists none the less. You should look into it. Evidence of it is everywhere. Something in particular to get you started that you could google is, "Genderless school"

I smell a conspiracy theory...

April 10th, 2013, 08:50 PM

elizabeth_rose

Quote:

Originally Posted by ninanoo

There are people doing it. I am not into the genderless movement at all. I am actually pretty offended by the concept as I believe in traditional female and male roles. But it exists none the less. You should look into it. Evidence of it is everywhere. Something in particular to get you started that you could google is, "Genderless school"

@ninanoo: I believe what Augusta meant was that, in terms of this particular naming trend, the gender-less argument does not apply as its sole occurrence is contained on one side of the theoretical naming spectrum. At least that is my interpretation of her comment.

@rowangreeneyes: The ends mean of this argument is to educate on the social culture of naming and what characteristic(s) it is inherently encouraging or deeming superior. This trend is expressed throughout society in a multitude of mediums. Is education not the means of cultural growth and understanding? Do debates and expression of perspective not encourage cultural reform? Would the trend continue if potential parents were educated on what they are subliminally projecting by naming their daughter James? Or is ignorance truly bliss?

May I ask, what is it that you particularly like about masculine names on girls? What significance does it hold for you?

April 10th, 2013, 08:51 PM

east93

Quote:

Originally Posted by emmabobemma

^^ Yes, my post is probably confusing. It's late here, and I overshared I suppose. I may erase it. East93, you don't notice little girls getting more and more disneyfied, wearing sparkly pink stuff more than 10 years ago? There's this thing of "spa parties" for little girls here that I find really disturbing, because it's sending little girls the message that they need to worry about their appearance. What a bore! They should be climbing trees, reading books, playing make-believe, not obsessing about primping! As for the other thing I mentioned, I have a friend who teaches sex-ed to kids, and says it's a real problem. There's a culture of gratuitous bl*wj*bs among teens and pre-teens, where girls are getting nothing, but feel obligated to perform... I do think this points to a lack of self-respect that comes from being told over and over that you're valued for your looks, for the things that make you valuable to men.

I actually don't notice girls being more disneyfied at all. Definitely not anymore than I was at least, which is right around the 10 year mark, and I didn't grow up feeling that I was inferior as a girl, or that I was obligated to do things for boys that I wasn't comfortable with. Not ever. I quite felt, and still feel, the opposite.
Interestingly enough, it was the girls who weren't particularly "girly" or were more tomboyish than I was, that lead into overly sexual lifestyles at a young age. As I think back on middle school especially, the ones doing the bl*w j*bs in the Pizza Palour washroom weren't the same ones particularly interested in being girly, they were far less girly.

In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with Spa Parties. I had one when I was 11 or 12, it was my idea, and I did at my home. Set up a bunch of stations, and we had a blast. And not of us grew up feeling that we were worth our appearance. Then again, that was 11/12.

A spa party isn't going to destroy a girls mentality, or have her think her worth is based on her appearance. Trust me, kids are already aware of appearances based on other factors, not nail polish and a foot scrub.
Telling a child "You're so pretty! Oh you're gorgeous! Hi pretty girl!" are far more leading to that mindset than pedicures.
I also don't get being told over and over that a child is valued for their looks, for the things that make them valuable to men from spa parties.
Spa is so much more than makeup, and nail polish. The whole realm of it is far more health and care based than primping. On the subject of nail polish: Nail polish doesn't make girls think that they need to fix their appearance. It makes them think their nails look extra pretty. Makeup on a 8 year old? Now that's something I think is damaging. Nail polish is far from it, in my opinion. I wore nail polish at 6, albeit peel-off nail polish, and I never thought I was ugly when I didn't wear it, and when I did wear it I didn't feel like I was worth more. I simply thought my nails looked extra pretty and loved when it matched my shirt or pants. Bonus points for when it matched my shoes.
I remember I got my nails done when I was around 7 or 8. My aunt gets her nails done in acrylic, well Gel now, and I always loved how they looked. She took me with her one day and I got air brushed red hearts on my nails.
I loved it, it was so much fun. The lasted around 2 weeks, and I was sad when they left, but did I feel that I was ugly now? No. I just thought it was cool that I had a design on my nails. Did I feel that now I had to make sure I was super pretty all the time? No. I still ran out side in overalls chasing my friends, touching the neighbours turtle, climbing trees, playing soccer, and collecting woodlice and lady bugs (one of which I named Rebecca btw :P)

This topic had me curious, and I decided I'd ask the girly girls of my daycare what their favourite activities were. I only managed to ask one, but you know what her answer was? "Wrestling with my dogs."Sophia is a completely girly looking girl, she loves to wear pretty clothes, and nail polish, and to dance, and be silly and be a girl. Yet her number one activity to do? Wrestling. With dogs at that.

I think the concept that being girly is degrading is more damaging than nail polish, and lip gloss. Girls primp more for other girls than for boys. Half the things women love to wear, men find ridiculous. It's other women that notice and comment on it.

I see more girls now being less princessy and more, all-rounded. What bothers me the most is the assumption that if a girl likes to primp, she must have low-self esteem issues, and doesn't value herself enough. Or that she's probably overly sexual, or lacking in substances.
That's an unfair judgement, and discriminating imo.

If a girl does boyish things, it's great! But if a girl does girly things, oh lets hurry and distract her. Girls like what they like, and they have that right. It's far more than spa parties, and glittery things that lead girls into doing overly sexual acts at a young age.

Also, not all of this reply is directed at you, emmabobemma. I kind of just went off on a spiel after a while. I don't mean anything personal by it. :)

April 10th, 2013, 09:04 PM

east93

Quote:

Originally Posted by rowangreeneyes

Every time a debate like this arises on Nameberry (which is very often,) I start contemplating two things...

1) Where is the end to this argument? What do the people who are so adamantly against "boys names on girls" plan to do about it other than not name their daughter a boyish name? Name their son Jessica? What is the point of going around in circles and over analyzing everything?

2) Why posters asking about a unisex or boy name on a girl get responses like "_____ is a boy's name!" or "I wouldn't use it because it sounds too masculine." And then a post about someone naming their daughter Elizabeth for the gazillionth time gets responses like "Oh that's such a beautiful combo!" and "What a gorgeous name for a little girl!" Double standards I guess. Although it does kind of suck to be in the super minority on Nameberry and *GASP* like unisex and masculine names on girls.

Also, when does a name go from masculine to culturally accepted as a unisex name? Take Riley as an example. Riley for girls didn't even breach the top 1000 until 1990. Riley was a common boys name since 1912. And now we don't even bat an eye at a girl named Riley/Rilee/Rhylee (other than it being too popular) Isn't Riley the "Maxwell" of the early 1990's? A name gets super common for boys, and then ultimately someone decides to use it for a girl. It isn't a new trend. It's happened to hundreds of names throughout history. So are we finally going to be the generation to break the mold and start using girls names for boys? Probably not. There will be little girls named William and Benjamin in the next decade or so, and eventually we're just going to have to either accept it as a part of human psychology or we change it.

1) The things with matters of opinion, is that there often is never truly an end.
As someone who is adamantly against boys names on girls, I would not name my daughter a boys name. However, due to participating in many discussions about it and the double standards, and reverse sexism is sets, I'm also far more likely to name my son Eden, than I was previously.
Discussions educate others, and sometimes a conversation inspires someone else. Conversations have inspired me to stick to my love of Eden for a boy, rather than cross it off because "Oh, but Eden's a girls name."
It's not over-analyzing if we're sharing experiences, opinions, and other information with each other. If you don't want to be a part of that, then don't participate. Different people participate in each conversation.

2) There is no double standard supporting or liking a girls name on a girl, over liking a boys name on a girl.
Girls names are meant for girls. Boys names are meant for boys. Masculine names are meant for boys, not girls. So it's not a double standard to like things that a meant for certain things.
A double standard would be to not support the name Dana on a boy because it's "too feminine", yet support names like Michael on a girl.

As for when masculine names make the switch to unisex, I have no answer or reasoning for that. All I know is that severally opposite gender names are not something I support or agree with. A boy named Cassandra, and a girl named Jeffery is not something I agree with. Imo, girls names are for girls, boys names are for boys, and unisex are for both.